Thursday, April 06, 2006

Akin to Stalking

I just got another stack of papers from my ex-wife via FedEx. Apparently she decided that yesterday's demands for attorney fees (to be heard on April 17) were insufficient, and she filed a motion to ask for $115,147.78 in attorney fees on April 28. Among other things, she wants to shut down this blog:
i. Reprehensible Conduct - Akin to Stalking

Mr. AngryDad created the blog site "" to journal his distorted version of this divorce process. He uses this blog site to try to intimidate witnesses who testify in this case against him, psychologists who examine him, my attorney, and those involved in the court system. Mr. AngryDad uses real names, places, and dates on this site. When these people whom he blogs 'google' their name, they will find references to themselves on "angrydad". "Angrydad" tarnishes people's reputations, in a widespread published forum.

I believe that Mr. AngryDad is using this blog site to try to intimidate me into backing down, giving in, and giving up. It is an attempt to isolate me by scaring away others involved in this action. Following is a list of people and referenced pages (attached hereto as Exhibit "C" are excerpts from the "Angrydad" blog site) representing Mr. AngryDad's reprehensible past time:

Court Personnel
1. Dr. Bret Johnson (Court Evaluator): pages 2,,17
2. Dr. Berrenge (Court Mediator): page 13
3. Judge Tomas E. Kelly (1st Judge): pages 18, 22
4. Judge William Kelsey (2nd Judge): pages 23, 24
5. Judge Irwin H. Joseph (3rd Judge): pages 25, 35
6. Dr. Bruce Bess (psychologist A.K.A. Dr. Igor Inkblot): pages 25, 26, and pages 36-40
7. Alex Calvo: page 41
8. Sarah Wood: page 41

Lawyer, Fiance, Father, Babysitter
1 . Jennifer J. Gray (attorney): pages 27 29, 32, 37, 42, 52
2. Bruce Travers (fiance): pages 48, 53 60
3. Judge Tony L. Eberwein (father): page 50
4. Micahaela (babysitter): page 56
Witnesses Who Testified at Trial
1 . Dr. Jason Camera (witness): pages 61, 62
2. Maria Agnes M. (witness): pages 63, 64
My home
I . Picture of the inside of my apartment: page 65

Examples of "angrydad"'s worst offenses in trying to intimidate those involved into not participating occur on page 2 against Dr. Bret Johnson:
For example, I mentioned the real name of the court appointed psychologist, Bret K. Johnson. He is the most bigoted and malicious person that I have ever met in my life. He decided that he didn't like me for various reasons, and that he was going to break all the rules in order to inflict as much punishment as possible on me and the kids. He voluntarily chose to appear in public court to use his reputation against me.

Bret K. Johnson is a homosexual psychologist who has no understanding of marriage, women, or children. His professional specialty is helping gay men get out of the closet. He actively and publicly goes around ruining people's lives under color of judicial authority. He does not follow the applicable statutes, court precedents, professional ethic rules, social science research, or generally accepted custody evaluation guidelines. He is the legal equivalent of a child molester. To my kids, Johnson's cruelty is the worst thing that has ever happened to them.
On page 1.5, Mr. AngryDad describes how he plans on writing "an essay detailing what was wrong with Dr. Johnson's report. It will be a long essay. It is my opinion that Dr. Johnson should never be allowed to testify in family court, and that he should never be allowed near children." Mr. AngryDad wrote this during the time that we were being evaluated by Dr. Bruce Bess (alias Dr. Igor Inkblot), knowing that Dr. Bess was aware of the blog site. Mr. AngryDad was trying to intimidate Dr. Bess into not writing a negative report, by showing that Mr. AngryDad was willing to go to exorbitant lengths to 'get back'. Mr. AngryDad's blog site behavior is akin to stalking. He journals his version of our divorce story, exposing and misrepresenting Ms. AngryDad's private life and activities for his own purposes. He is trying to make himself feel known, even when he is not around. This is what a stalker does.
Actually, I was not trying to intimidate Dr. Bret Johnson or Dr. Bruce Bess. The above rant against Johnson was written after he had exited from the case. I did write a tirade on this blog against using inkblot tests in family court custody disputes, but I had no idea that we would eventually be ordered to see Dr. Bess or get inkblot tests many months later. I doubt that Dr. Bess would have even known about this web site, except that my ex-wife gave him a printout of everything on the blog.

I am not sure what my ex-wife's point is. Perhaps that she thinks that she can badmouth me publicly in open court, but that I shouldn't be able to defend myself publicly on my blog. Perhaps she thinks that some of those named people are embarrassed about their testimony and actions in the case. Perhaps she just wanted an excuse to mention that her father is a judge. (I hadn't mentioned it.) Perhaps she read on my blog about the Boston court that banned a book about a child custody case, and figured maybe she could get a similar order. Perhaps it is just a ploy to get sympathy from the judge, or to get the judge to dislike me.


Anonymous said...

Don't let them intimidate you. Last I checked, we still had freedom of speech in this country. Even if your opinion of these people is totally wrong, you've a right to express it.

My ex decided she would no longer respond to my e-mails when I posted some of her e-mail messages to me on my blog. It never would have occurred to her to try to stop me from posting. She's smart enough to know she can't win a battle like that.

Good luck and keep the postings coming.

Anonymous said...

Wow. As someone who often has dealings with family court through my job, all I can say is... this blogg will do noting but hurt your chances for a fair end to the situation. You of course have the right to say what you want. I don't agree with your ex-wife's claims that it is stalking. But the judge will likely take a very dim view of it concidering the angry tone of your postings.

George said...

To Masculiste: We had an agreement on marital property, but she is now trying to break it. This is the first hearing on that issue. We've argued attorney fees several times in court, but there is no end to her demands.

To Anonymous: Are you suggesting that the judge will rule unfairly against me just because he disagrees with what I say on my blog?

Anonymous said...

Well... Ideally no. A judge is supposed to be impartial of course. But I have seen enough judges in my time who like their power and don’t like anyone that challenges what they have to say even if its wrong. I’m a social worker (I’m sure we aren’t your favorite people right now either) but I actually work with people in your situation. I tell the people I work with all the time "listen, its unfair, I know, but just play the game the way they want you to play it now. There will be plenty of time for talk when its all over." I know that sounds chickenshit and goes contrary to what we hear about standing up for ourselves etc. Unfortunately as far as the law goes, especially when you are on the side you are on, the cards are in the judges hand. I’m not trying to diminish what you are saying. I’m just saying that if your ex wife is making this blog an issue... use caution. Ask your lawyer what he thinks. Sorry I did the last one anonymous. I thought I had to have a password to leave a comment a different way.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.